sw1mushfandomcom-20200215-history
Template talk:User projcoord
The role of Project Coordinator was instituted September 5th, after a concise discussion between Danik and myself, in order to accomodate the emerging prominence of Projects on the Wiki. The designation went to Xerxes, ImperialFH, and SW1 Kyle, and meant that they were A)significantly contributing to the Wiki, B) directing and contributing to the goals of a/the project at hand, and C) were responsible for checking over and/or straigtening out any contextual or structural issues. Eleven days later, Xerxes was made a wiki-Admin, which supercedes (at least in function) a Project Coordinator. I have no qualms about sharing or giving authority to anyone else, provided that they show up. I'm not a power-monger, and I'm not the end-all and be-all of this, or any other collaborative entity. The/any projects need a leader, though, and the wiki-Admin can't be at the head of them all — and certainly shouldn't be over those that are not relevant to themselves. -- Hawke / Rtufo 15:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC) * Would you compare / contrast this point of view with Wikipedia:What adminship is not, please? -- Xerxes 17:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC) * In regards to Project Coordinator, or to Admin-ship overall? -- Hawke / Rtufo 18:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC) ** Both? Either? My concern is that, left open to interpretation, people will view this title as conferring some sort of authority above and beyond other contributors, as 'ownership' of certain articles / projects, and forget that a wiki is run by consensus, that an administrator (or in this case coordinator) is "one who organises and facilitates, rather than one who controls." -- Xerxes 21:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC) ** Right, but even in the game, there's levels of accountability and organization in order to coordinate things such as RP activity. The role of Project Coordinator has nothing to do with Admin-ship. It has to do with directing and coordinating projects. And projects, as we know, are community efforts... but they have the potential of bogging down or getting very chaotic if not directed with a sense of cohesion. So, as I said, a Project Coordinator is qualified under A, B, and C. Nothing more than that. If I happen across an article entitled "NR's Shoe Closet", created by some anonymous IP#, I can contact the Project Coordinator (in this case, SW1 Kyle), and ask, "Does this fit into your project? Know who might have created it?". SW1-Kyle might say "Yeah, so-and-so did that the other day", and I can leave it as such, because it's being "looked over". Make sense? -- Hawke / Rtufo 17:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC) *** I have a problem with statements like this: "And, your project coordinator (for the NR) has directed this on the NR's project page." It seems to imply that one contributor is allowed to just tell another what to do. There might be a fundamental difference of opinion here on how consensus fits into the system. Larger wikis with larger projects seem to get by fine without anyone being "in charge." When it comes to content and how content is organized, all contributors (Admin, coordinators, everyone else) are all equal. -- Xerxes 21:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)